The decision to no longer limit how much a corporation can donate to a specific campaign. This changes American politcs entirely, but I'm unsure how much of an effect this will have on our legalization movement. It just seems to me, on the down side of things drug companies now are going to have free reign to donate millions, and millions, and millions of dollars on ads campaigning against legalization efforts.
I think that at the rate that legalization debates are popping up, by the time these companies start funding the ad-wars, we'll have at least 1 state legal. The domino effect will still prevail despite the increase in dumb ass commercials.
Whats next? Are corporations going to be allowed to cast a vote in elections? If there is one thought that makes my nose bleed, its the fact that corporations are considered legal people. These skeezy greedy money making bastards jumped on the 14th amendment as the way to make it possible. They perverted the amendment made to ensure the equality of all races under the law into something that lets them swing UNBELIEVABLE judicial and political power. Down with the LLC! I would be comfortable betting that one day major corporations are going to have their own representation in the legislature in the form of senators and representatives. Ask an army guy who's spent a few years in the service and sees how things are run, some will tell you that they expect the entire army to be privatized by the next 20 years or so...sounds crazy to me, but its the scary kind of crazy that makes you look into that sort of thing.
its gunna be on the ballot in calli. id say thats the first one falling over. If these big companies start to campaign against cannabis, we need to step shit up. sacrifice a dub a month and donate to NORML. Get out and campaign for any initiatives or pro pot politicians in your area. Let folks you know that may be unsure on the issue where you stand and that they can ask you questions, be prepared with plenty of facts and credible sources to back them up. Grass roots (pun not intended) can beat big bucks.
I cannot believe this actually passed. It seems obvious that the politicians must be benefiting from this monetarily or otherswise. It just seems so blantantly bad that it couldn't possibly pass. This country is due for an overhaul/revolution/collapse/rebirth/something.
I dont believe it is going to hurt us. They were going to mount a vigorous campaign anyway; its not going to be worse. Instead of sending money to buy policy this way, now they are back to sending it that way... Meet the new boss.. same as the old boss. There are about 10X more campaign ads and money spent now than when they passed that law anyway lol. Dont get worked up about it - soon, congress will go to work to draft one in compliance with the court ruling... and then those companies will have to go back to politicians the other way. Legalization will happen because their arguments are hollow and everyone knows it. Just because people hear the same old tired arguments again wont change the polling numbers - and we have the economy on our side - which is the most important thing.
I'm not worried about the legalization of hemp. I am worried about Presidential Candidates more than anything. Namely the flood of corporate supported candidates. It became obvious that candidates' ability to win was directly related to their (positive) media exposure. People will come to power with the interests of corporations, not the people. This seems like a civil rights issue. The people will become powerless against these money-mongerers.
Well.. I happen to agree with the decision. This is to me a 1st amendment issue... and i'm pretty protective of that right. Corporations are run by people and people have a right to use their money to support who they will. This is what the court struck down .. its a federal crime "for a corporation to use any of its funds to criticize a candidate for federal office within thirty days of a primary election or sixty days of a November general election." Has nothing to do with mj or legalization or the fight they were bringing against that and I dont believe it will affect the legalization debate in any measurable way.
Starbucks is backing an anti-marijuana campaign in Colorado and elsewhere. Just like the teaparty/teabagger campaign and Scott Brown, this campaign is being fueled by corporate money. You all slammed me for the "Say goodbye to Cannabis Legalization" thread and now, this happens. I told you so. We just had a coup d'état in America and America isn't even noticing. This country deserves what it gets for sitting on its ass and letting this happen. It's time to call an impeachment proceeding for the Supreme Court. They have betrayed the people.
I am actually beginning to agree with zoom420 on this issue. These companies started out with people, just like you and me. So they became successful, so they have alot of money, they are still people with rights. Just because they have more money than I, who is to say that they should have restrictions on what they can reasonably do with it.
I wish I could be as optimistic as Zoom420 and believe this is just more of business as usual and won't change anything, but I do believe this is different. Yes, corporations have incredible amounts of political power already, from the local level where Walmart elbows its way into communities despite opposition, to the national where Obama was forced to make concessions to big pharma to even get a health care bill this far. I could give more examples, but I'm sure most people reading this thread are already keenly aware of this reality. The difference here is that the gloves are now completely off. What limited restrictions were in place on the political activity of corporations are aboslutely gone. I have seen many disheartening legislative and judicial decisions relating to cannabis, but this is bigger, this is the single most detrimental decision to not just efforts at legalization, but to representative democracy as a whole. Central to this decision is the notion that free speech is one of the core values of our democracy, and any attack on it should be subject to strict scrutiny. However, it fails to differentiate between the freedom of speech of a billion dollar multi-national and the freedom of speech of an individual. When the voices of the people in public discourse can be drowned out under a mountain of corprate cash, our freedom of speech is meaningless. The majority opinion cited the following in its justification of its decision... The First Amendment does seek to foster debate, but unrestricted spending makes it a one sided affair and effectively silences non-corporate entities. I can not believe that this is what James Madison intended when he put forward the Bill of Rights. Every American, whether on the left or the right, should be very concerned about this decision and its long reaching implications. Now the cynics among you may say that we've never really had true representative democracy, and that politicians have always been bought and sold, and there is a lot of truth in that sentiment, but that doesn't mean we should be complacent when the core values of out democracy are further eroded. This decision should not be confused as another minor step in the ever expanding power of corporations, but regonized for what it is, a major leap which threatens the very foundation of our nation. This may sound like hyperbole to some, but I think it is an appropriate expression of the potential severity of this decision. I certainly hope Rep. Grayson has some success in his efforts to limit the now unchecked power of corporations, but I'm skeptical.
Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to address this notion that corporations should be afforded the same rights as individuals, as I strongly disagree. Rather than a lengthy response, I would like to quote the opening of the dissenting opinion written by Justice Stevens and would encourage the blades here to read the dissenting opinion for themselves for a more in depth understanding of Stevens' view... Link to opinion
It is the dissenting slant to state it essentially: "A corporation shouldnt be afforded the same rights as a person". That is not the argument A corporation, in terms of the 1st, is a group of people running a business. People have a right to pool their resources and forward their ambitions in terms of their belief system. Just because this group of people file certain paperwork to work within the frame work to conduct business set up by the government does not negate their 1st amendment protections. In that regard and in terms of the 1st amendment, A group of people have the same protections as a person... regardless of their umbrella title they assume to conduct that business. that is my opinion anyway...
I think you both have valid points. At the barebones level, this is absolute equality. Yet, this is going to give lobbyists some scary power.
So you feel that say a chinese controlled American registered corporation has a right to be involved in our political process? Because thats what is going to happen.
I too am aghast at this ruling. I strongly support efforts to amend the Constitution to state that only people are people and thus protected by the Constitution. "We the corporations" | Move to Amend But this may be a way for re-legalization advocates to raise money in order to spread the message. While there are business segments that will fight legalization, there are others that will support it. Paper manufacturers, agricultural machine manufacturers, plastics manufacturers, building material producers to name just a few. Maybe even Big Pharma could see the benefit in marketing extracts, though that's less likely. The point is that there are many potential beneficiaries of cannabis legalization. Now these beneficiaries can also spend money on efforts to repeal prohibition. We just have to show them how it is their best interest to join us. This can work both ways.